Rokstok Lite Kimber Edition

[S.Clancy]

Who wants one...

 

[Formidilosus]

The more pertinent question is-

Blind mag as factory

Or


AICS compatible bottom metal?

 

[RK93]

The more pertinent question is-

Blind mag as factory

Or


AICS compatible bottom metal?

Blind mag

 

[HuntWyld]

The more pertinent question is-

Blind mag as factory

Or


AICS compatible bottom metal?

AICS

 

[S.Clancy]

The more pertinent question is-

Blind mag as factory

Or


AICS compatible bottom metal?

I'd do whichever got the stock in production

 

[Antares]

84M with blind mag and factory bottom metal, but also offer a redesigned mag box/follower/spring so if feeds properly.

 

[Formidilosus]

84M with blind mag and factory bottom metal, but also offer a redesigned mag box/follower/spring so if feeds properly.

I don’t think S2H or UM has interest in that. I have zero use for a blind mag- in this day it is a complete non-starter.

 

[PathFinder]

AICS for sure. IMO it's half the reason for UM to make the Kimber stock. There are flush fit poly mags for those worried about weight and flush fit.
It's likely possible to just use the R700 SA mold and very slightly modify the inlet for the Kimber's smaller receiver diameter and recoil lug position. Action screw spacing and bolt handle position are essentially identical. The port cutout is slightly different.

 

[JCMCUBIC]

Is there an AICS bottom metal available for the 84M?

 

[Wrangler13]

In for 2 84m. Either blind mag or flush fitting mag would be great.

 

[Formidilosus]

The real non-starter is rifles that feed like shit, cycle like shit, and have inconsistently accurate barrels... so why are we even talking about Kimber?

Well I agree. But, I know a bunch of people that love Kimbers and want better stocks for the. Well, “a bunch” is relative. But, I understand the UL sheep people or want to be sheep people’s rational.

A Kimber with a legit detachable mag in a correctly designed stock would be a pretty fantastic true UL rifle.

 

[Formidilosus]

Ok. Sounds like it was a rhetorical question then.

Not a rhetorical question-

Making the stock to fit current Kimber M84’s with blind mag= doable because it’s simple.

Making a Kimber M84 AICS bottom metal= probably doable and worthwhile because it is a real improvement.

Making a mag box, spring and follower for the Kimber M84= zero interest as it is not a thing any of us want or believe in, and the amount of work to get it right isn’t worth it for the 3 people that would buy it.

 

[Antares]

I deleted my comments because I'm just being salty and didn't want to clutter up the thread, but I see you were quoting them as I was deleting them. I understand what you're saying.

 

[S.Clancy]

Well I agree. But, I know a bunch of people that love Kimbers and want better stocks for the. Well, “a bunch” is relative. But, I understand the UL sheep people or want to be sheep people’s rational.

A Kimber with a legit detachable mag in a correctly designed stock would be a pretty fantastic true UL rifle.

Preach

 

[6eagle]

The more pertinent question is-

Blind mag as factory

Or


AICS compatible bottom metal?

AICS

 

[handwerk]

I'd be happy with either factory BDL or AICS, what might be the barrel channel options?

 

[Levy_ken]

I would 100% prefer an AICS compatible bottom metal.

Already mentioned on the other thread but I’m in for an 84M.

 

[Formidilosus]

I deleted my comments because I'm just being salty and didn't want to clutter up the thread, but I see you were quoting them as I was deleting them. I understand what you're saying.

My bad man- I didn’t see that you had deleted it.

 

[6.5x284]

In and I want AICS compatible bottom metal! But I’d pre order either to get the stock made.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Dave_S]

Blind mag would be acceptable, but would definitely prefer AICS bottom.